2009 design concepts

[wrigs]

Just think about it

Why should BMW develop those parts for their 2008 car? All this has to be redevelopped again to fit on the 2009 tub, that would take the double amount of time thus the idea becomes useless.

Believe me, it is an 'Alpha' F1.09, it wouldnt be sufficient to build parts for the 2009 car when they have to change it all over again to fit the 2009 car.

The nose on the car is totally different and im 100% sure that it wouldnt fit on their 2008 tub, as then you wil get a weird shape on the bottom as the 2008 nose is significantly lower.

We can't seriously be arguing facts here. Robert Kubica said yesterday:

"This week we're already testing this, but next year's car will be different, we're trying to get as much data as possible." (http://f1.gpupdate.net/en/news/2008/11/ ... -car-ever/)

Let there be absolutely no doubt that this is a 2008 chassis. What BMW are doing here, I believe, is to get a rough idea of how the new regulations impact the car in reality. They can run all the simulations they want to, do all the wind-tunnel testing they can afford, but it's still not the same as taking to the track and gathering some "real" data.

Consider this, too: Why would they build a 2009 prototype with 2008-like cooling (grills on the sidepods)? They would have to rebuild a big part of the outer-shell after having gathered all that data and then test it again. Why not build a 2009-prototype that is completely legal and then optimize that?

[mx_tifoso]

Williams front wings: '09 test spec on top, '08 spec botton



Great comparison image showing both specs. 'Bar555' is going to have his work cut out for him once the '09 cars come out .

And I also believe that every team is currently running '08 spec chassis, with '09 spec aero (and full/simulated KERS). Once '08 winter testing is done then they will produce the track ready chassis for official and complete specification testing.

[guy_smiley]

Williams front wings: '09 test spec on top, '08 spec botton



Great comparison image showing both specs. 'Bar555' is going to have his work cut out for him once the '09 cars come out.

heheh you got that right! we'll try to assist you wherever we can, bar!!! =D> a sincere thanks for all of your comparisons--past, present, and especially future!!

[WhiteBlue]

The 2009 BMW chassis will be significantly different to 2008.

All teams will have to increase the space where the fuel bladder curently resides in the protection of the tub. That space will have to take KERS elements that need protection against collision forces. Teams have known that for a long time. KERS elements will be generally water cooled so that radiator design will be very different internally. You will not only have oil and engine water cooling radiators but MotGen radiators and even battery radiators. This will make for some different shapes in front of the engine.

Slim noses will generally be more likely with designs that have mechanical KERS. Electronic battery KERS may have space allocation in the the nose to help forward weight distribution. This could also trigger a need for radiators in the nose, big ducts in the tub for cables and tubes and even quick connectors for fluids and power to the noses. Lets not forget that the nose also has a servo system for wing adjustment.

The 2008 chassis does not have all that stuff so they probably have to store a lot of the systems independantly in the nose, hence the wide design.

I think it is ridiculous to have all that structural changes done to an interim chassis. BMW have done a very clever mole in order to test a bunch of things with their 2008 chassis. They are significantly ahead of other teams with this and hopefully it will give them an edge over the oppo.

[bill shoe]

Hi, I'm new to the forum. I've read the forum for a while, but first time posting. Glad to be here!

Follow on question to what WhiteBlue was saying- Where will teams put KERS motors? Moving weight toward the front end is extremely important in order to get overall quicker laptimes with KERS. I've heard the optimum location is in front of the engine running through the crankshaft. However, is this allowed given the "frozen" engines? If not then how could they approximate it? Possibly running a torque shaft in the bottom of the V under the airbox?, or maybe a shaft down the side of the engine? What other ideas does anyone have for packaging a 2009 F1 car with KERS in order to get a decent front weight percentage? I'm hoping we'll see some creative layouts.

Also, is there any reason a KERS system would be unable to function as a competent onboard starter? Can a KERS electric motor running backwards take the place of a reverse gear? (reverse used to be required, currently not sure).

[woohoo]

Regarding the BMW F1.09 and others:
I think that the cars are 2008 cars with 2009 aero, or insides.
Designing a new carbon tub does that its time, and the crash testing has to be passed and so on.

Also, its just a single test.
As Testing is obviously simpler when you have only one unknown variable, ill think that the teams tested only one thing at a time.

So the BMW is a F.08 with intirm 09 aero.

[Nat]

Hello guys!! I am new to the forum, though reading it for years already -- you are doing a realy good job here!

I have a question regarding the article http://www.grandprix.com/ft/ft20831.html and the following quote by Paddy Lowe:

"You would think that upwash from the rear wing is bad," Lowe said. "The upwash is strong, but a very strong inwash at ground level is also driven by the rear wing. That inwash brings new high-energy air in at ground level. If you took the rear wing off altogether you would lose that effect and the wake would be a lot worse."

Could please someone explain (or maybe draw a picture for better illustration and understanding!) what the upwash and especially the inwash are, where they take place, and how they influence the following car.

Thank you very much!

[BorisTheBlade]

My guess is, that the low pressure area that is produced by the upwash gets filled by the air, floating around the sides of the car in front. That air has less turbulences than the air coming directly from that car. So it helps the following car in producing downforce. If you hadn't that upwash, you also wouldn't have that "fresh" air but only the turbulent air from the car in front of you.

[Ogami musashi]

The inwash and upwash combined create clockwise rotating vortices that pull up the turbulences.

Without that, wheels create anticlockwise vortex that let the turbulence at ground level.


The central part is the one that suffer the most from upwash (from the upwash motion) while being the last and least beneficiary of the inwash, hence the central part was made lifting so that the loss of total pressure there result in less lift thus more grip.

[Nat]

Ogami musashi, thanks very much for the pictire and the explanations! Do you by chance have also a side view of the wake?

[Scotracer]

Ogami musashi, thanks very much for the pictire and the explanations! Do you by chance have also a side view of the wake?

http://www.fia.com/resources/images/130 ... raphic.jpg

Upper image.

[GTO]

So will the 2009 car have less net drag than 2008?

[Ogami musashi]

What can only be said: the OWG configuration (based on F2004) has 10% less drag, that's all..

after that, what will happen with the others we don't know.

One thing: during the tests all cars posted times with 2009 downforce levels (tells already a lot on the speed they get) but cars only simulating were reputed to have less drag thus they were faster but according to several drivers, the final configurations of 2009 cars (it is said none of the cars there were close to what the 09 version will be..hopefully that means the BMW will change..thanks god) would be on par with the drag of the simulated 09DF levels on 08 cars.

In the end, i'm pretty sure they'll end up faster.

[wrigs]

What can only be said: the OWG configuration (based on F2004) has 10% less drag, that's all..

after that, what will happen with the others we don't know.

One thing: during the tests all cars posted times with 2009 downforce levels (tells already a lot on the speed they get) but cars only simulating were reputed to have less drag thus they were faster but according to several drivers, the final configurations of 2009 cars (it is said none of the cars there were close to what the 09 version will be..hopefully that means the BMW will change..thanks god) would be on par with the drag of the simulated 09DF levels on 08 cars.

In the end, i'm pretty sure they'll end up faster.

I've been seeing this 10% figure a lot on F1-sites lately. The thing is, we don't how it came about.

A 10% reduction in drag could mean anything. The new cars are so different from previous years and according to articles, the OWG estimates a 50% reduction in downforce. So when do you measure this 10% reduction in drag? At similar angles of attack both front and back? At half the downforce of the normal car? Base drag? There are so many factors playing in here that this figure, so ignorantly quoted by everyone, could mean a million different things.

And, there's a pretty good chance that this 10% reduction in drag wont translate directly into straight line speed. The teams could easily compensate for those 10% by using more wing to get more downforce, while apparently maintaining straightline speeds from recent years.

[Ogami musashi]

I've been seeing this 10% figure a lot on F1-sites lately. The thing is, we don't how it came about.

A 10% reduction in drag could mean anything. The new cars are so different from previous years and according to articles, the OWG estimates a 50% reduction in downforce. So when do you measure this 10% reduction in drag? At similar angles of attack both front and back? At half the downforce of the normal car? Base drag? There are so many factors playing in here that this figure, so ignorantly quoted by everyone, could mean a million different things.

And, there's a pretty good chance that this 10% reduction in drag wont translate directly into straight line speed. The teams could easily compensate for those 10% by using more wing to get more downforce, while apparently maintaining straightline speeds from recent years.

The OWG is not the average fan gathering. The test were done in windtunnel with an F2004 then an F2004 clean then in 09 configuration.
Thus the drag results are of course based on the conditions that is straight line and the drag measure is max total drag.